Trump’s tax reform—The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office (CBO) reported that under the Act individuals and pass-through entities like partnerships and S corporations would receive about $1,125 billion in net benefits (i.e. net tax cuts offset by reduced healthcare subsidies) corporations would receive around $320 billion in benefits.the Act would add an estimated $2.289 trillion to the national debt over ten yearsThe individual and pass-through tax cuts fade over time and become net tax increases starting in 2027 while the corporate tax cuts are permanent.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Cuts_ ... ct_of_2017

[1] These tax cuts drastically increase our National Dept[2] give a permanent tax break to the rich[3] throw a few crumbs to the working class for a few years [4] then (for the working class) the rate goes back to where it was.

U.S. BUDGET DEFICIT REACHES HIGHER LEVEL UNDER TRUMP THAN AT ANY Trump’s Increased spending in 2018 bumped the deficit up 17 percent to $779 billion in fiscal year 2018, largely due to an increase in spending and a decrease in corporate tax revenue because of the Republican tax cuts late last year. The deficit is now on track to surpass $1 trillion before 2020.https://www.newsweek.com/budget-deficit ... us-1171204

Trump filed bank bankruptcy six (6) times, after accruing about $1.8 billion in debt; he will take America with him on his seventh (7) bankruptcyhttps://tinyurl.com/y9lozu3q

----Donald Trump's greatest achievements---- (to date)

Trump Signs Bill Revoking Obama-Era Gun Checks for People With Mental IllnessesPresident Donald Trump quietly signed a bill into law Tuesday rolling back an Obama-era regulation that made it harder for people with mental illnesses to purchase a gun.https://tinyurl.com/ycz7qp4j

Trump sons' hunting in focus as US lifts import ban on African elephant trophiesThe Trump administration’s decision to loosen restrictions around the import of elephant trophies.Donald Trump Jr and Eric Trump are prolific big-game hunters and during the 2016 campaign, images re-emerged of the pair on a 2011 hunting trip posing with animals they had killed on safari, including an elephant, a buffalo and a leopard.https://twitter.com/J_Rob66/status/7596 ... 96/photo/1

Hilary won the popular vote, Trump bought of the Delegates representing the votersHillary Clinton…………… 65,844,610 Donald Trump's………… 62,979,636 with a difference of ………2,864,974.

Trump is president because Russian and others hacked into our electoral system manipulating the data. They also flooded our media with “false” accusations of misconduct by Hillary and associates. It was and is being proven to be from foreign sabotage.

In the here and now; Trump has committed treason.

In law, treason is the crime that covers some of the more extreme acts against one's nation or sovereign.. A person who commits treason is known in law as a traitor.

chuckpeterson wrote:Trump is president because Russian and others hacked into our electoral system manipulating the data. They also flooded our media with “false” accusations of misconduct by Hillary and associates. It was and is being proven to be from foreign sabotage.

What do you say--?

I say, that could you please STOP BLAMING MY COUNTRY FOR ANY STUPIDITY, LIE AND INCOMPETENCE YOUR ELITE PERFORMED?!

------------------------------

- Who would won in battle between strawman Liberal-Democrat and strawman Conservative-Republican?- Scarecrow from Oz; he was strawman before it became political.

The people who voted for Trump believed every lie that came out of that lying con artist’s mouth. I started to believe all of Trump’s lies because I was told he was a great businessman who could drain the swamp.

It wasn’t until after Trump got into office that I finally discovered what a lying con-artist he truly is.

chuckpeterson wrote:The people who voted for Trump believed every lie that came out of that lying con artist’s mouth. I started to believe all of Trump’s lies because I was told he was a great businessman who could drain the swamp.

It wasn’t until after Trump got into office that I finally discovered what a lying con-artist he truly is.

Now Trump is spewing out the same lies thinking he can do it again.

"fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me"

I think not -

I did not vote for Trump because I believed his lies, I voted AGAINST Hillary because I DIDN'T believe her lies. When I was given my classified materials briefing, we were warned that various breaches of laws and/or regs would result in various penalties. Hillary did EXACTLY what we were told not to do. It came down to 1) vote for someone who had allegations of guilt or 2) for someone who was proven to be guilty.

doug941 wrote:I did not vote for Trump because I believed his lies, I voted AGAINST Hillary because I DIDN'T believe her lies. When I was given my classified materials briefing, we were warned that various breaches of laws and/or regs would result in various penalties. Hillary did EXACTLY what we were told not to do. It came down to 1) vote for someone who had allegations of guilt

doug941 wrote:I did not vote for Trump because I believed his lies, I voted AGAINST Hillary because I DIDN'T believe her lies. When I was given my classified materials briefing, we were warned that various breaches of laws and/or regs would result in various penalties. Hillary did EXACTLY what we were told not to do. It came down to 1) vote for someone who had allegations of guilt

Those e-mails were proven, PROVEN, to have contained classified materials with classification headrs still on them. Remember her "I didn't know what those 'C' meant"?Some of those emails were taken from an internal intranet which has NO EXTERNAL ACCESS. She gave access to those e-mails to her maid. She gave access to those e-mails to her lawyers. every single one of the above was/is a felony. In fact if she allowed lawyer "Tom" to see 100 e-mails with classified material, that constitutes 100 individual felons. And if lawyers "George", "Susan" and "Abigail" also saw them, that is 300 more felons. Simply having those e-mails in her computer was multiple felons.

You wouldn't ask a plumper about your heart health, so how about talking to someone who had a security clearance about clearances? Oh wait, you just did.

In fact if she allowed lawyer "Tom" to see 100 e-mails with classified material, that constitutes 100 individual felons. And if lawyers "George", "Susan" and "Abigail" also saw them, that is 300 more felons. Simply having those e-mails in her computer was multiple felons.

You wouldn't ask a plumper about your heart health, so how about talking to someone who had a security clearance about clearances? Oh wait, you just did.

And apparently you didn't pay very much attention to those briefings on the regulations if you did in fact ever receive any, because no every single individual carelessly handled e-mail is not a felony. Nor is it multiplied by how many individual people might have gotten to see the information because of that handling. That's absurd.

Do you think Edward Snowden can be charged with MANY BILLION felonies because he publicly released multiple pieces of classified information and the entire planet got their hands on it? Don't be completely ridiculous. Any judge in the country would laugh any prosecutor who tried to make a charging claim like that out of court and then ask the Bar to review how the hell they had a law license in the first place. That is a *cartoonish* understanding of how the law works.

Additionally, violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1924 can be either misdemeanors OR felonies depending on prosecutorial determinations of the severity of the offense. For example, Petraeus (who was guilty of a FAR FAR FAR worse breach than Clinton was ever accused of) was charged with MISDEMEANOR violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1924.

ONE misdemeanor violation. When he handed over REAMS of highly classified material in multiple volumes to Broadwell. So no it's not one charge per piece of classified data in a breach.

So maybe, just maybe, before going on a rant about what an authority you are on the laws surrounding the handling of classified materials you should have a clue what you are talking about.

And all that aside, I see you're still kind of skating past the difference between being accused of getting careless with the handling of some sensitive e-mails and the laundry list of criminality that permeates Trump's ENTIRE LIFE STORY.

doug941 wrote:In fact if she allowed lawyer "Tom" to see 100 e-mails with classified material, that constitutes 100 individual felons. And if lawyers "George", "Susan" and "Abigail" also saw them, that is 300 more felons. Simply having those e-mails in her computer was multiple felons.

You wouldn't ask a plumper about your heart health, so how about talking to someone who had a security clearance about clearances? Oh wait, you just did.

And apparently you didn't pay very much attention to those briefings on the regulations if you did in fact ever receive any, because no every single individual carelessly handled e-mail is not a felony. Nor is it multiplied by how many individual people might have gotten to see the information because of that handling. That's absurd.

Do you think Edward Snowden can be charged with MANY BILLION felonies because he publicly released multiple pieces of classified information and the entire planet got their hands on it? Don't be completely ridiculous. Any judge in the country would laugh any prosecutor who tried to make a charging claim like that out of court and then ask the Bar to review how the hell they had a law license in the first place. That is a *cartoonish* understanding of how the law works.

Additionally, violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1924 can be either misdemeanors OR felonies depending on prosecutorial determinations of the severity of the offense. For example, Petraeus (who was guilty of a FAR FAR FAR worse breach than Clinton was ever accused of) was charged with MISDEMEANOR violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1924.

ONE misdemeanor violation. When he handed over REAMS of highly classified material in multiple volumes to Broadwell. So no it's not one charge per piece of classified data in a breach.

So maybe, just maybe, before going on a rant about what an authority you are on the laws surrounding the handling of classified materials you should have a clue what you are talking about.

And all that aside, I see you're still kind of skating past the difference between being accused of getting careless with the handling of some sensitive e-mails and the laundry list of criminality that permeates Trump's ENTIRE LIFE STORY.

As you said, charges can be charged as either a felony or a misdemeanor, likewise they can also be charged a singles or as a group. The law says that a single person seeing a single document he/she is not cleared to see is a single crime. Seeing multiple docs is either multiple charges or a single charge. Where multiple charges are filed as single charges is normally a case of the workload. One hundred, one thousand, one hundred charges as individual charges have to be filed AS single charges with all the paperwork that entails.

Snowden and Manning will not be charged/were not charged with all the craploads they could have been because of these procedural issues. If the Feds wanted to file every charge they legally could have, the paperwork would have filled multiple 18 wheelers.

And don't forget how Comey had to play 7 dimensional chess to excuse her handling of classified material. He rewrote Federal law to say what it doesn't say to legally excuse her. Possession of classified materials in non-cleared areas is a crime even if the person having it is cleared to have it. General XYZ looking at a classified intel briefing about PRC military strength while sitting in his office is legal if he is cleared for those doc. Him looking at them while sitting in a McDonalds eating a cheeseburger is illegal.

And while you mention 18 US Code 1924, I noticed you DID NOT mention 18 US Code 798.

gcomeau wrote:And apparently you didn't pay very much attention to those briefings on the regulations if you did in fact ever receive any, because no every single individual carelessly handled e-mail is not a felony. Nor is it multiplied by how many individual people might have gotten to see the information because of that handling. That's absurd.

Do you think Edward Snowden can be charged with MANY BILLION felonies because he publicly released multiple pieces of classified information and the entire planet got their hands on it? Don't be completely ridiculous. Any judge in the country would laugh any prosecutor who tried to make a charging claim like that out of court and then ask the Bar to review how the hell they had a law license in the first place. That is a *cartoonish* understanding of how the law works.

Additionally, violations of 18 U.S.C. § 1924 can be either misdemeanors OR felonies depending on prosecutorial determinations of the severity of the offense. For example, Petraeus (who was guilty of a FAR FAR FAR worse breach than Clinton was ever accused of) was charged with MISDEMEANOR violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1924.

ONE misdemeanor violation. When he handed over REAMS of highly classified material in multiple volumes to Broadwell. So no it's not one charge per piece of classified data in a breach.

So maybe, just maybe, before going on a rant about what an authority you are on the laws surrounding the handling of classified materials you should have a clue what you are talking about.

And all that aside, I see you're still kind of skating past the difference between being accused of getting careless with the handling of some sensitive e-mails and the laundry list of criminality that permeates Trump's ENTIRE LIFE STORY.

As you said, charges can be charged as either a felony or a misdemeanor, likewise they can also be charged a singles or as a group.

but they absolutely CANNOT simply be multiplied by the number of people information reaches after it is breached. That is crazy.

The law says that a single person seeing a single document he/she is not cleared to see is a single crime. Seeing multiple docs is either multiple charges or a single charge.

Yeah? Show me the exact part of the law that says what you just typed. I'll wait.

And don't forget how Comey had to play 7 dimensional chess to excuse her handling of classified material. He rewrote Federal law to say what it doesn't say to legally excuse her.

Yeeeeah.... no. No he did not.

Possession of classified materials in non-cleared areas is a crime even if the person having it is cleared to have it.

And whether it is prosecuted as a crime is to a large degree a matter of prosecutorial discretion on the severity of the offense, the intent or lack thereof of the person who committed the offense, etc...

This was rather non severe, and there was zero established intent of misconduct. It was simply an act of poor judgement in choice of e-mail infrastructure. So as Comey accurately stated, no prosecutor would reasonably bring charges in this case.

General XYZ looking at a classified intel briefing about PRC military strength while sitting in his office is legal if he is cleared for those doc. Him looking at them while sitting in a McDonalds eating a cheeseburger is illegal.

And while you mention 18 US Code 1924, I noticed you DID NOT mention 18 US Code 798.

Because that statute requires *knowing and willful disclosure or publication* of classified materials? Which did not happen here? So it's completely irrelevant?